Evaluating Work:

1
Evaluating Work

• Job Evaluation

2
Job-Based Structures Job Evaluation

• Job evaluation process of systematically
  determining the relative worth of jobs to create
  a job structure for the organization

3

• The evaluation is based on a combination of
• Job content
• Skills required
• Value to the organization
• Organizational culture
• External market

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
Assumptions Underlying Different Views of Job
Evaluation
7
Defining Job Evaluation Content, Value, and
External Market Links (cont.)

• How-To Major decisions
• Establish the purpose
• Supports organization strategy
• Supports work flow
• Is fair to employees
• Motivates behavior toward organization objectives

8
Determining an Internally-Aligned Job Structure
9
Defining Job Evaluation Content, Value, and
External Market Links (cont.)

• How-To Major decisions (cont.)
• Single versus multiple plans
• Characteristics of a benchmark job
• Contents are well-known and relatively stable
  over time
• Job not unique to one employee
• A reasonable number of employees are involved in
  the job
• Depth and breadth of job

10
Benchmark Jobs
11
Comparison of Job Evaluation Methods
12
Ranking

• Orders job descriptions from highest to lowest
  based on a global definition of relative value or
  contribution to the organizations success
• Simple, fast, and easy to understand and explain
• Initially, the least expensive method
• Can be misleading
• Two approaches
• Alternation ranking
• Paired comparison method

13
Paired Comparison Ranking
14
Classification

• Uses class descriptions that serve as the
  standard for comparing job descriptions
• Classes include benchmark jobs
• Outcome Series of classes with a number of jobs
  in each

15
Classifications for Engineering Work Used by
Clark Consulting
16
Point Method

• Three common characteristics of point methods
• Compensable factors
• Factor degrees numerically scaled
• Weights reflect relativeimportance of each
  factor
• Most commonly used approach to establish pay
  structures in U.S.
• Differ from other methods by making explicit the
  criteria for evaluating jobs compensable factors

17
Designing a Point Plan Six Steps

• Conduct job analysis
• Determine compensable factors
• Scale the factors
• Weight the factors according to importance
• Communicate the plan, train users prepare manual
• Apply to non-benchmark jobs

18
Job EvaluationThe Point Method

• Example Software Engineer
• Job Description
• The Software Engineer designs, develops, tests
  and maintains one or more of our products or
  internal applications. The software engineer
  works as a member of an engineering team
  developing, designing, and maintaining one or
  more of our products or internal applications.
  This position reports to the appropriate Project
  Manager.
• Job Specification
• Bachelor's or undergraduate degree in Computer
  Science, Information Systems, Electrical
  Engineering or equivalent experience. Masters or
  graduate degree is desirable. Understand Intranet
  and Internet technologies http, firewall.

19
Step 1 Conduct Job Analysis

• Point plans begin with job analysis
• A representative sample of jobs (benchmark jobs)
  is drawn for analysis
• Content of these jobs is basis for
• Defining compensable factors
• Scaling compensable factors
• Weighting compensable factors

20
Step 2 Determine Compensable Factors

• Compensable factors characteristics in the work
  that the organization values, that help it pursue
  its strategy and achieve its objectives
• Compensable factors play a pivotal role
• Reflect how work adds value to organization
• Decision making is three-dimensional
• Risk and complexity
• Impact of decision
• Time that must pass before evidence of impact

21
Step 2 Determine Compensable Factors (cont.)

• To be effective, compensable factors should be
• Based on strategy and values of organization
• Based on work performed
• Documentation is important
• Acceptable to the stakeholders
• Adapting factors from existing plans
• Skills, and effort required responsibility, and
  working conditions

22
Compensable Factor Definition Multinational
Responsibilities
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
Factors in Hay Plan
28
Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method

• The Hay Guide chart-profile method uses three
  universal factors, eight subfactors, and
  forty-three degrees and levels to evaluate jobs.
  They are as follows

• Know-How
• Practical procedures, specialized knowledge, And
  scientific discipline.
• (8 levels)
• Managerial (4 levels)
• Human relations (3 levels)
• Plus 3 degree choices per grid.

29
Hay Guide Chart-Profile Method

• Problem-Solving
• Thinking environment
• (8 levels)
• Thinking challenge
• (5 levels)

• Accountability
• Freedom to act
• (7 levels)
• Job impact on end results (4 levels)
• Magnitude (4 levels)

30
Step 3 Scale the Factors

• Construct scales reflecting different degrees
  within each factor
• Most factor scales consist of four to eight
  degrees
• Issue
• Whether to make each degree equidistant from
  adjacent degrees (interval scaling)

31
Step 3 Scale the Factors (cont.)

• Criteria for scaling factors
• Ensure number of degrees is necessary to
  distinguish among jobs
• Use understandable terminology
• Anchor degree definitions with benchmark-job
  titles and/or work behaviors
• Make it apparent how degree applies to job

32
Factor Scaling National Metal Trades Association
33
Step 4 Weigh the Factors According to Importance

• Different weights reflect differences in
  importance attached to each factor by the
  employer
• Determination of factor weights
• Advisory committee allocates 100 percent of the
  value among factors

34
Step 4 Weigh the Factors According to Importance
(cont.)

• Select criterion pay structure
• Committee members recommend the criterion pay
  structure
• Statistical approach is termed policy capturing
  to differentiate it from the committee a priori
  judgment approach
• Weights also influence pay structure

35
Job Evaluation Form
36
Overview of the Point System
37
AAIM National Position Evaluation Plan
Points Assigned to Factor Degrees
1st Degree
2nd Degree
3rd Degree
4th Degree
5th Degree
Factor
Skill 1. Knowledge 2. Experience 3. Initiative
and Ingenuity Effort 4. Physical Demand 5. Mental
or Visual Demand Responsibility 6. Equipment or
Process 7. Material or Product 8. Safety of
Others 9. Work of Others Job Conditions 10.
Working Conditions 11. Hazards
14 22 14 10 5 5 5 5 5 10 5
28 44 28 20 10 10 10 10 10 20 10
42 66 42 30 15 15 15 15 15 30 15
70 110 70 50 25 25 25 25 25 50 25
56 88 56 40 20 20 20 20 20 40 20
38
Job Evaluation Example

• Job Points Reference Wage
• A Clerk 45 12/hour
• B Acct Clerk 55 16
• C Accountant 75 22
• D HR Mgr 85 25
• E Asst Adm 80 26
• F Office Mgr 85 28

39
Step 5 Communicate the Plan and Train Users

• Involves development of manual containing
  information to allow users to apply plan
• Describes job evaluation method
• Defines compensable factors
• Provides information to permit users to
  distinguish varying degrees of each factor
• Involves training users on total pay system
• Includes appeals process for employees
• Employee acceptance is imperative
• Communication

40
Step 6 Apply to Nonbenchmark Jobs

• Final step involves applying plan to remaining
  jobs
• Could involve both designers and/or employees
  trained in applying the plan
• Tool for managers and HR specialists once plan is
  developed and accepted
• Trained evaluators will evaluate new jobs or
  reevaluate jobs whose work content has changed
• May also be part of appeals process

41
Step 7 Develop Online Software Support

• Online job evaluation is widely used in larger
  organizations
• Becomes part of a Total Compensation Service
  Center for managers and HR generalists to use

42
Who Should be Involved?

• Managers and employees with a stake in the
  results should be involved
• Can include representatives from key operating
  functions, including nonmanagerial employees
• Organizations with unions find including union
  representatives helps gain acceptance
• Extent of union participation varies

43
Who Should be Involved? (cont.)

• Design process matters
• Attending to fairness of design process and
  approach chosen likely to achieve employee and
  management commitment, trust, and acceptance of
  results
• Appeals/review procedures
• Inevitable that some jobs are incorrectly
  evaluated
• Requires review procedures for handling such
  cases and helping to ensure procedural fairness

44
Who Should be Involved? (cont.)

• I know I speak for all of us when I say I speak
  for all of us
• Procedures should be judged for their
  susceptibility to political influences

45
The Final Result Structure

• The final result of the job analysis job
  description job evaluation process is a
  structure, a hierarchy of work
• Managerial, technical, manufacturing, and
  administrative

46
Resulting Internal Structures Job, Skill, and
Competency Based
47
Balancing Chaos and Control

• Job evaluation changed the legacy of
  decentralization and uncoordinated wage-setting
  practices left from the 1930s and 40s
• It must afford flexibility to adapt to changing
  conditions
• Avoids bureaucracy and increases freedom to
  manage
• Reduces control and guidelines, making
  enforcement of fairness difficult